The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the defendant's crime of this case differs from the crime of fraud for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, and the loan customer is different, as well as the loan customer is a large amount, and each of the above crimes is deemed to be in a substantive concurrent relationship. However, although each of the above crimes is in a comprehensive crime relationship, the above final and conclusive judgment was effective against the defendant, and thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. If a number of conducts or series of conduct falling under the name of the same crime is continuously conducted for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent and the legal benefits of the damage are the same, each of these conduct should be punished by a single comprehensive crime in total.

(2) The defendant's act of receiving a certain amount of cash in lieu of No. 1 provided through the above agency and paying it to the above loan applicants, and the defendant's act of receiving a certain amount of cash in lieu of No. 1 provided through the above agency and paying it to the above loan applicants according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. The defendant, as a credit service provider, recruited a number of persons who wish to obtain a loan for the purpose of acquiring a loan fee (per 50,000 won or KRW 100,000 per case) and let them join the L.C. agency operated by the N., or SK. agency operated by A, and the defendant's act of committing the crime of this case, among the criminal facts that became final and conclusive on November 1, 2013, the defendant committed the crime of this case by the defendant as "I-B-ro tin" through the agency operated by A, and the purpose and the period of the victim's act of fraud as an agent and the crime of tin.